Fifteen years after the
High Powered Committee chaired by P N Haksar submitted its path breaking
report on the working of the three National Akademis, the Sahitya Akademi,
the Sangeet Natak Akademi and the Lalit Kala Akademi, and the National
School of Drama, we are witnessing the biggest ever crisis in the SNA,
that has not only taken a political turn but has also polarized the artiste
community like never before.

While, it would be a little naïve
to lay the blame on one person, one gets the feeling after reading the
entire Haksar Committee Report that there are more grey areas that exist
beyond personality clashes and need to be addressed.

It must be noted that unlike previous
committees, which relied on statistical data and questionnaire responses
to arrive at certain conclusions, the Haksar Committee interviewed
nearly 1200 people from the fields of performing and visual arts and literature,
in over eighteen cities. Here, we look at some broad issues raised by the
committee with special reference to the SNA.

Impact and InteractionThe most common accusation levelled
against the Akademis has been that they are Delhi- centric. Moreover, the
committee had reported that there was little evidence of the presence of
the State Akademis in the border areas of the country which were ( and
are) known to be functioning as the "limbs of the State Governments" often
serving the interests of the political personalities. How far have we come
in granting full autonomy to the State Akademis? If one looks
at the recent brawl in the SNA, then the first lot of artistes who raised
their banner of revolt belonged to Chennai. Chennai has a strong sabha
culture that sustains a number of dancers and musicians, unlike in North,
East or West where most artistes expressed their anger only in private
and refused to come out in public for fear of losing the patronage of the
SNA, by aligning themselves in groups. Does that not mean that we still
lack a cohesive infrastructure to promote, project and protect the regional
interests of the artistes? With Zonal Cultural Centres coming
into the picture, how are we ensuring that the work conducted by them is
in keeping with the demands and aspirations of the State Akademis, and
not overlapping with those of the national Akademis?

Need for Cultural Policy and Central
InterventionThough Haksar Committee had firmly
turned down the idea of India having a cultural policy and had also shown
little respect towards an idea of having greater Governmental control over
the Akademis, the recent SNA controversy has for the first time brought
the Government into the picture, with both sides making representations
before the ministers and seeking their intervention. Interestingly, nearly
three decades ago, Prof. Noor Ul Hasan, the then Minister for
Education, had sought to bring a central legislation for a graded system
of governmental powers to regulate the functioning of centrally funded
societies like the Akademis. The Central Societies Regulation
Bill was introduced in the Parliament and public evidence was also recorded
by a committee set up for the purpose. However, before anything could happen,
the Parliament was dissolved and the bill lapsed. The bill could have provided
the government with various powers to regulate the working of the Akademis.
One does not know if that would have served the purpose of having these
institutions in the first place. Surely, from the inaugural speeches made
by leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Azad and S Radhakrishnan, the
Akademis were to be the highest bodies for promoting artistic excellence!

Cultural InfrastructureOn the lines of the National Endowment
Funds for Arts in the USA, the Haksar Committee had expressed confidence
in the Indian government running on the same formula to provide rich patronage
to arts and culture, by ensuring a more balanced corporate and state sponsorship
to the arts. The committee had written to a number of corporate houses
who expressed willingness to participate in this endeavor. Today
individual artistes claim to have the support of the corporates, which
proves to benefit a particular individual. The creation of Indian NEFA
can check this trend and ensure a cohesive approach towards not only all
arts but also artistes across the board, keeping in mind not only their
seniority and influence but also talent. If we can flaunt our 'exquisite'
knowledge of American Culture and ape them, why can't we, like them, create
a national fund by roping in industry tycoons? More NEFA can also be used
to create basic infrastructure in big and small cities, which may include
creating more performance and rehearsal spaces on one hand, to creating
art galleries and better libraries on the other, all of which is desperately
required within the country.

Media, Education and AkademisThe Haksar Committee had suggested
that the heads of the Doordarshan television and the AIR (All India Radio)
must be made members of the General Council and a greater co-ordination
should be effected to promote dance, music, theatre and literature. Going
by the reach of Cable TV, efforts have to be made to even talk to the private
media owners because of their impact, on how to ensure that the coverage
is not relegated to canning Page 3 butterflies of art. The committee believed
that it was a long-term process and could not be addressed unless a demand
was created among the masses. For this, it suggested an aggressive training
and teaching of the arts at the school and college level. This was in keeping
with the National Policy of Education formulated by the Government
in 1986. One feels that it should be compulsory for every student to take
up the study of one branch of arts at least up to eighth standard. It could
be dance, music, theatre, painting etc. This will automatically generate
a need to create jobs for specialized teachers, and further enable the
youth of the country to take up the study of the arts, because it will
then become a paying profession. However, for this dream to become a reality,
there has to be willpower and patience.

Lastly, the Haksar Committee had
suggested a uniform method of selecting the Chairpersons of the three Akademis
- creating selection committees for each of the three Akademis consisting
of three members- one member, nominated by the General council, one member,
being the ex chairperson/president of the Akademi and one person nominated
by the President. Each selection committee could send a list of three names
to the President, who could make the most eligible person from the list,
the next chairperson of the Akademi. In the case of SNA where the current
chairperson's appointment has been termed political, one feels that even
if we follow strict rules of selection there will still be doubts about
the genuineness of the selection. So, despite its inherent errors, election
may be the best process to appoint the chairperson. While there will be
hectic lobbying for the post, one can be assured that there will not be
a mid term crisis, if the chairperson is a popular /majority choice!

Personally speaking, an intensive
study on the working of the three Akademis must take place after each decade.
The Haksar Committee came out with its findings eighteen years after the
Khosla Committee report on the Akademis. A decade old study by the Government
may be tagged with special grants to the Akademi that performs the best
or makes the most vital contribution in that decade. As M V Ramakrishnan,
Member secretary of the Haksar Committee says, "This report will stand
the test of time and it is the final word on the workings of the Akademis."
Even after fifteen years, he is confident of the significance of the report
and its conclusions. And he is not far from the truth!

Lada Singh is a Bharatanatyam
dancer, journalist, poet, writer and a regular contributor to www.narthaki.com